tv Forbes on FOX FOX News December 12, 2009 11:00am-11:30am EST
that it is a good stock. ben is the guy who is he is busy. too too busy. >> a new push for the president's new jobs plan. the house hoping to vote on what could be a $150 billion bill just next week. now, president obama says the money will help buy jobs but some say that it will barely help to buy votes. welcome to "forbes on fox." let's go in focus to find out who isite with steve forbes. his newest book, how capitalism will save us, makes a great holiday gift this season. joining steve is elizabeth mcdonald and neil weinberg and victoria barrett and quentin harding. is this bill more about votes than about jobs? >> sure it is. they know they got a big problem with next year's congressional election so they come up with this gab bag of stuff. if you look at it it is not so good.
the good thing on paper is cutting the capital gains taxes for small business but only for one year so you is to give contributions to get it renewed and at the same time raising capital gains taxes on venture capitalists for high-tech companies, good job creates so the bill is riddled with that kind of stuff. david: so victoria, the eye is onto prize and the prize is on the votes in the midterm elections. >> well, look, yeah. this is washington. there is always a prize that the eyes are on, but i give obama credit here, because he's targeting small businesses which the creators of jobs in this country, and he's doing tax cuts. i mean, come on, steve. you can't argue with tax cuts even if they temporary. he is talking about raising capital gains taxes for small businesses, waiving fees and promoting small business loans. ly borrow a phrase from liz, who knows what ornaments will be put
on this bill once congress gets done with it, but i like what i see so far. david: liz. >> the problem is deficit finance. most of t the tax cuts great. david: finance by borrowing more money. >> that's right. the $787 billion stimulus plan, 3, 40% of that was tax cuts as well. is this the right way to go? more so, you get the government off the backs of the u.s. entrepreneur. that's the way you drive growth, not through government machinations. get the government out of the entrepreneur's way. david: quentin is this more about jobs or votes? >> i don't think you have to be that cynical at this time of year. it's not about votes. it's about jobs, and what's wrong with that? the unemployment rate is at 10% and the private sector is being strangled by a dysfunctional banking sector. in the third quarter of the year, net private sector lending fell by $2.3 trillion. the government can step in. they have held back before hoping the banks could do it. as we have learned last year,
the banks aren't smart and virtuous. they act in a heart mentality and are overpaid. i wish there is another section of the market that could give the money to them. david: i would be more concerned about the government strangling business than being concerned about the banks strangling business. if the banks think these are not loans they want to make, why not listen to them? there are pet projects here. we have the economy growing. we have jobs -- unemployment going down. now the government still has to intervene here with job growth and cash for caulkers, with green jobs, with saving jobs from bureaucrats. at what point do we let the market take care of it? david: is this about jobs or votes? >> i think it genuinely will create jobs for tax consultants, window caulking consultants. i'm going to say jobs by
themselves will not be enough. you need output. if you just wanted to create jobs, how about my bill, my whole bill? everybody is required to dig a hole in their backyard. that would create jobs with no useful output. david: just a make work job that will go away as soon as the funding dries up? >> any taxpayer driven job will die up once the funding dies up. the president wanted to use $200 billion of supposed tarp reductions, in other words, that this would be tarp savings from the bank bailout program, by the way, that was stretched over ten years, so his plan was to front load it now for a jobs bank when he initially said i will use every penny of that back to reduce the deficit, so it's clearly a move to buy votes. david: on the other hand, steve, we're still pleading jobs but not at the same pace. there does seem to be some improvement on that front. >> all the more even for the government to step back and let entrepreneurs, people who create real jobs, get to work. for example, the corp. pat tax
break, second highest in the developed world. why not cut that? why not stabilize the dollar so you get more productive investments? why not have regulators get off the backs of banks an punish the banks when they try to make small bisen business loans. there other things he can do. david: victoria, i have never heard you stand up for a government pam before what has changed on this one? >> i agree with everything steve just said. i think what he suggested would do a lot more, but at the same time, in the context of this administration i think this kind of a tax cut is a great move for our country. i think it will do a favor to small businesses an spur job growth, and yes, there is a lot of stuff attached to it that i don't like, the green jobs stuff, there is a lot of gimmicks in this. if you are a small business owner, this is good news for you. david: go ahead, quentin. >> bill, your cynicism is getting in the way of your reason. it is not about digging holes
and filling them up. when you impof a highway or bridge, you add value to the country. when you improve the east coast rail corridor, you add the potential for productive output. let's get positive. david: bill, you love trains. >> i love trains. i love tax cuts. i hate temporary tax cuts an targeted tax cuts. david: so reduce taxes across the board and make it permanent. >> good point. >> the issue is what creates jobs? the f.d.r. jobs works program or was it world war ii? was it carter's '81 jobs factor, did that help? no, it took years to make its way into the sis. by that time, unemployment went down. the money went to intermediaries like helping middle class bureaucratic programs. david: you saying a new deal re-do? >> i don't know it it really works. >> it is the keep of socialism. what you have is you have got the government which is deficit spending saying gee, it won't
cost us as much as we thought for the tarp bailouts so why don't we just use it for social causes, some might say tax cuts are good but most of them democratic causes, green jobs, and creepy socialism. >> they call us neocons so how about neosocialists so we hit them back with that. with the so-called job creation, every job you create by pulling money out of the economy, you are putting two jobs in the private sector. with green jobs in spain, according to the study there, will are 2.2 jobs lost for every green job key eighth. markets people. people tell entrepreneurs what they like and don't like. >> we tried unfettered markets. we got the subprime crisis. it doesn't work. the banking sector is broken. it is not lending to small business. somebody has got to get the money. there the government is the actor on this stage. await a second, quentin.
boast the government and the markets created the subprime crisis and they can together, possibly, the markets that are the diving force behind job creation, not the government. >> it is small businesses. they are in the market every day. aid to small businesses will create jobs. david: steve, you mew must be delighted that at least they're turning their attention to small business and particularly tax bakes for them. >> sure, and again, i wish they would make those things permanent but if they really want to get the economy moving, small business and all, get the dollar stabilized, reduce tax rates, get over the catch and trade. get over the nationalizing healthcare. if they took a sabbatical for a year, they would look like jean yuses. david: i think climate-gate is getting us over cap and trade quickly. did you hear there is is a government agency just declaring the air that you and i breathe out every day is a danger to our health? you're the danger to our health!
just defeat add republican attempt to block a final vote on a a massive spending bill. looking at capitol hill live right now, the 60-34 vote to end debate happened a short time ago during a rare saturday session setting the stage for tomorrow's vote tomorrow on a $1.3 trillion measure will fund a number of government departments a new tape surfacing from a new york born al qaeda member. he claimed that the group is not behind bombings in pakistan and attacks have left hundreds of people dead and called such attacks unislamic and claims the terror group is being framed by for the bombing by u.s. and pakistani services. now back to forbes on fox. there is a compromise now to drop the government-run part of
the senate healthcare plan and harry reid says he has one, but steve says don't be fooled. this so-called compromise is government-run care and it's going to cost us all mendte. >> it is. it is changing the name of a weed to a rose doesn't make it a rose. that's exactly what they're trying to do here. there it is still nationalized healthcare. medicare is in huge debt. they are suspecting that won't cure anything and the new enterprise they're trying to put it will pay them what government employees get which substantially increases premiums, have a lot of people who are sick are going to raise premiums so the bottom line is very expensive. as you know, the centers for medicare and medicaid, they did analysis on this. the ak ewe aries did and found out will cost money instead of saving money. >> an additional $234 billion. >> this e febl -- affects 4 million americans. that's the problem with it. it is so small it doesn't matter. that is not going to cost you
anymore. i tell you what, you already have government-run healthcare. how is that? for every congressman, this is six health industry lobbyists. they white the bills. they got themselves an anti-trust exemption that they won't get rid of. the so-called private sector continually milks medicare over bills it and abuses it. you call that big government waste and fraud, but it is the private sector doing t they haven't locked up. they have it sown up. that is the real scandal. >> the center for medicare and medicaid studies says it will cost an additional $234 billion more than we're now paying for healthcare. >> thank god some people in washington still have integrity and will call the numbers as they see them. look, this is a totally ridiculous exercise, particularly the non-profits. all you have to do is see how poorly they work is to look at rural telephone companies who have thwarted broadband penetration in rural america. 70 million people don't have broadband wireless because they live in small areas.
that's because these local co-ops have no competition. it's almost the same as having a government monopoly. call it what you will. it is still government control. >> the government plan don't believe you can insure millions more without costing more. 64% of people think the reforms will cost them money. i think the people right. >> i agree with the people as well, except without reforms, nothing has passed yet, costs are going up anyy way. my healthcare plans going up chances are yours are. your deductibles rising next year. we're going to spend $4 trillion a year ten years from now instead of just under $1.5, so costs going up regardless. now, are crofts going up less with this man than if we let it run on its own? >> according to the c.m.s. the group that monitors medicare and medicaid, it will go up a lot more if we take the reid plan. >> that's true. look, none of these plans out
there -- maybe the g.o.p. side, you don't control costs. what we're talking about now with the non-profit exchanges they are really a halfway house to the public option. that's what they are. i like how the democrats like to have it both ways. medicare actually is a success because it only has 2% overhead costs, administrative costs. meanwhile the i.r.s. is doing the collecting for them. that's an indication that they're not regulating it, not overseeing it which is why fraud, waste and abuse comes in. that is a fake statistic that the democrats bring in. the key thing here is tort reform. everyone congressman who is a lawyer in congress should recuse themselves from voting on healthcare if they do not vote for tort reform. >> real tort reform is there. it is not just about costs. it is also about quality. 52% of the american public say that they believe quality will deter rate this oop healthcare as a as a result of these reforms. >> let's get some competition in
there. i'm going to be totally in favor of a public option more than any democrat but i got two little provisos here. number one, once we have the public option, the public entity cannot get any subsidies or tax benefits from aetna or united healthcare don't get. >> they're paid for by taxpayers, by definition! >> number two -- let me finish this. the number two provision is that once we is this public option since we now have harry reid and nancy pelosi running an all wise and benevolent insurance company, we would repeal all, all regulations. >> how long will this idea last in a congress that has no more sense than a flock of geese? i mean, you're talking about congress running this, except congress actually has a good health plan that they're not owning up to everyone. that's what is funny. >> taxpayers pay 70% of that. >> i can't buy into t i can't
buy in at the same rate my congressman can. >> that government plan, those plans as a whole going up at a faster rate than private sector plans. >> quentin, go ahead. >> good for the republicans this week for criticizing the democrats who wouldn't allow a bill on -- discussion of a bill on drug imports from other countries because the health lobby has sown up the democrats. no antitrust whatsoever f you introduce something in the way of a public option, that is some kind of competition with these guys which we need. >> the question is whether this is just paving the way for socialized medicine. >> you know what really gals me about the administration on healthcare and everything else is that they take innovation for granted. back to the theme of geese, the golden goose needs incentives to innovate. this would take always incentive and drive it offshore. welcome sing singapore and
american homeowners." now, steve forbes, geithner says people not paying their mortgages are the responsible ones. >> hey, we're not talking about people here who are up to date on their payments and suddenly lost their job or something like that. in this case, we're talking about flippers, part of this housing bubble, buyer loans, an half of those foreclosures are people who lied about what their incomes were, and a big bunch of these mortgages were no down payment. that's not responsible by any angle. david: people who lied on their first mortgages and aren't paying their debt, are they really responsible? people? >> tim geithner believes that some responsible people can get into trouble through no fault of their own. we set that aside. about the liar loans and things like, that remember that you had officers of these banks that we later bailed out sitting there acting like your friend and fiduciary. >> we all agree on that. plenty of braim blame to go
around. >> people who got paid on the liar loans are the people who took the commission for getting them signed. david: but that doesn't take the people who lied on their loans off the hook, does it? >> not at all. what geithner is trying to do is shift the ball away from the government's responsibility because remember, they were going to solve this problem, but right now, the government is backing with taxpayer money, 90% of all new home mortgages, up from 30% four years ago, yet foreclosures are going up, expected to be 3.9 million this year, up 20% from last year, so their strategy is backfiring. david: quentin, the re-default rate, defaults of people who already had their mortgages modifyed is very high, too. >> look, dave, i just noticed the color of your super fine book is almost the same as the color of your super fine magazine, which has a great cover story r where we disagree is when mr. geithner says "responsible homeowners" you think it means crooks, hires, people who lied on their
application. what makes you think that's what he means? maybe he means people who are underwater but want to stay in their houses and the rate is about to explode because they got a bad a.r.m. or interest only and were told not to worry about it and they want to stay in and we are want to keep that supply off the market and we want them to pay or offer them a lease to own option or a rental option or some kind of flexibility in the system, so there is a lot more supply in the market. david: rich, we got to get you in. go ahead, rich. >> markets can't function without price, and you know, this is yet another attempt to distort the price of homes. we can't hit a bottom in the housing market and we can't hit a bottom arc real bottom in the economy and have a full three to four percent d.g.d.d.g.d.p. growth in the economy until this hits bottom. >> the handful of people who qualify under quentin's thing, people who is jobs or lost jobs and want to stay in their homes and things like that, no one would argue with them.
we're talking about the vast majority where they were liar loans, no down payments and the like. that's messing up the system. david: coming up, a segment that will heat up the global warming summit in copenhagen, the big polluter stocks that are ready to make you lots of green! this is green we all love. i hope they get fox in denmark.
wallet. applied materials. >> they make solar panels but are brig polluters. >> they are insider selling there and they are losing. what is to like? i like west star energy. you get a 5.6% dividend yield. >> two former executives are under indictment. david: come on, they were just having fun. >> they put used carbon into the air but this will benefit from the boondoggle stimulus spending >> sales are declining and sales are less profitable, i don't know what you like about t. david: amazon? >> they will deliver one book to your door but i like them. you get to make a lot of interesting technology bets and they have always been expensive and the stock has continued to go up. >> people buy books on-line and they don't